|
Post by midhilldexters on Feb 18, 2013 19:00:16 GMT -5
Rezz, it is not uncommon for this to happen, it's happened to people I know, it happened to Patti. There are things in place already to deal with it. The Pedigree and genetics committee would handle it and advise the Board, and yes probably pedigrees of animals would need to get corrected.
Carol K
|
|
|
Post by rezzfullacres on Feb 18, 2013 19:07:47 GMT -5
Rezz, it is not uncommon for this to happen, it's happened to people I know, it happened to Patti. There are things in place already to deal with it. The Pedigree and genetics committee would handle it and advise the Board, and yes probably pedigrees of animals would need to get corrected. Carol K Carol; What if there was no matching genotype on file? What than.....I know it has happened and it will unfortunately happen again..In my opinion I still have more questions than answers.....
|
|
|
Post by rhonda on Feb 18, 2013 19:07:57 GMT -5
Rhonda; I agree with you but will take it 1 step further..... My opinion of what needs to happen is this: 1) Experts need to be consulted as to which scientific tests will best suit the dexter breed now and going forward. 2) Decide which lab offers the ADCA the best deal for all required testing... 3) Implement the plan We are not talking about years and years we are talking months to make sure that this gets done right, not halfway and than the association ends up spending more time and effort to fix a poorly thought out and implemented plan... I think we are on the same page.
|
|
|
Post by midhilldexters on Feb 18, 2013 20:10:46 GMT -5
Its hard to predict what they would have to do, they would have to work with what they had available for animals and go from there. Saying yes to genotyping will stop any uncertainty for future breeders and owners though. Its good to have all these questions, It makes other think and question how things are done.
Carol K
|
|
|
Post by rezzfullacres on Feb 18, 2013 21:15:20 GMT -5
[quote author=midhilldexters board=dna thread=2994 post=22575 time=1361236246. Saying yes to genotyping will stop any uncertainty for future breeders and owners though. Its good to have all these questions, It makes other think and question how things are done.
Carol K[/quote]
Carol; Please do not think that I am against genotyping, I just want to see it done right and if it takes 6 more months than so be it.....I am just concerned that there are many situations out there that can come up and we as an association need to be fully prepared to deal with them.....
Rhonda; Yes I do believe we are on the same page....
|
|
|
Post by Olga on Feb 19, 2013 1:19:13 GMT -5
When I submitted my opinion on new reg requirements to the ADCA, this was my idea on genotyping: no obligate carrier/non-carrier status should be awarded lest the animal is parentage confirmed. I think of it as an intermediate stage toward a genotyping requirement. It would nudge breeders toward genotyping their breeding animals and address the problem of "automatic obligates". Ever since I found out about Legacy testing, I started to genotype all my calves, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by Julie on Feb 19, 2013 5:55:58 GMT -5
Olga, this is an excellent idea for an intermediate requirement! While I hope the ADCA can make a decision in favor of required genotyping soon, this idea of "assumed obligates" as reported on ADCA registrations should end ASAP. I have to admit I freaked out a little bit when I figured out that my heifers' PHA status is based on the honor system. While I trust the breeders, I would much prefer parentage verification. Until that happens I will be doing the whole testing profile through Legacy to satisfy myself and future buyers.
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Feb 19, 2013 7:11:33 GMT -5
After testing our entire herd for Chondro and PHA a while back, we've begun the process for genotyping all of our females too. It is a significant expense for a large herd.
I posed this question some time back but I wonder why it's never really been explored further...what about a "LIMITED REGISTRATION" for female Dexters not genotyped? This allows the animals to stay in the registry, and there would be a "FULL" registration for those that are genotyped (and perhaps fully tested for chondro/PHA).
The limited registration would contain the proviso that hair samples are to be preserved and stored at the designated test lab (obviously there would be a small fee, or perhaps the ADCA could include this in the registration fee) so that at anytime that animal or their offspring could be brought back into the "Full" registry with the payment and testing of the required ancestor(s) of that animal.
Those of us with "FULL" registrations could continue to promote our comprehensive testing and the security of the parentage of our animals for sale, and those who don't wish to pursue that direction with their herd can continue to breed and enjoy their Dexters, without the worry that if they don't keep up with the genotyping their herds will completely fall out of the registry and become grade Dexters.
Say for example I saw a small herd of Dexters that I wanted to purchase that were limited animals, I could either negotiate the upgrade with the seller or undertake the upgrade myself if I thought the genetics or quality of the animals was worth it.
Just a thought...feel free to add your inputs.
Hans
PS I might also add this...if there were any genetic issues that would crop up sometime down the road, DNA samples would be available for testing to trace back the origins and alert owners of descendants of the affected animals that they may have affected animals themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Cascade Meadows Farm - Kirk on Feb 19, 2013 14:30:14 GMT -5
Requiring the genotype and parentage verification of every registered heifer and bull, prior to designating obligate status for PHA or Chondrodysplasia is just common sense. This is something that cannot be put on the back burner for years and years. Every single year that passes results in more and more animals that have errors in their pedigrees. Some of these errors will be very costly to whomever gets stuck with the case(s) of mistaken identity. It is irresponsible and a detriment to our breed to put off a requirement for parentage verification any longer. We have the technology available, it is affordable ($25 per test), and it should be done by anyone that is offering their registered breeding stock for sale to others. It should also be demanded by any buyer of registered breeding stock. Patti We've learned that we can't fully trust the microsatellite-based parentage tests because they can confuse one close relative with another. So if you have a non-pha, non-chondro bull, and he has a very closely related son (lots of line breeding), that is a carrier, and you have a new calf born, you often can't be certain which bull is the real sire of the new calf. Microsatellite testing fails in those cases. The microsatellite test could tell you that the sire of the new calf is your non-carrier bull, while it really was the closely related carrier bull. Only SNP-based parentage tests can accurately and separately identify and distinguish between two closely related bulls.
|
|
jamshundred
member
Help build the Legacy Dexter Cattle "Forever" Genotype database
Posts: 289
|
Post by jamshundred on Feb 19, 2013 17:33:52 GMT -5
Kirk,
On this matter you err. I keep trying to tell you. . . .SNPS is not there yet.
I currently know someone testing with UCD because Geneseek could not determine parentage between two bulls in a linebred herd with SNPS, and perhaps another lab not willing to go the extra distance for an owner would also not be able to determine it with microsatellites, but UCD is not "another lab". They are exceptional! They will extend markers on any case where they can not get a clear and defined result.
I know another case where the bull the owner thought was "Daddy" was not and SNPS did not resolve that case either amongst a number of animals. UCD has expended far more time in analysis on this case than the fees charged for the genotypes tested by microsatellite to try and resolve the parentage. (UCD also took the owner's SNPS reports on a number of other animals in the herd to try and help the owner resolve the parentage issue.
I have some experience on line bred herds and extended markers. There is NO Dexter owner that has worked to genotype and parentage confirm animals in a herd with the closely related animals that I have and SNPS though SNPS were considered. . . . they were not considered to be able to provide more answers than microsatellite testing.
Someday maybe. By then there will likely be a bridge between the two technologies to make a transition beneficial.
Judy
|
|
|
Post by Cascade Meadows Farm - Kirk on Feb 19, 2013 23:07:19 GMT -5
Kirk, On this matter you err. I keep trying to tell you. . . .SNPS is not there yet. I currently know someone testing with UCD because Geneseek could not determine parentage between two bulls in a linebred herd with SNPS, and perhaps another lab not willing to go the extra distance for an owner would also not be able to determine it with microsatellites, but UCD is not "another lab". They are exceptional! They will extend markers on any case where they can not get a clear and defined result. I know another case where the bull the owner thought was "Daddy" was not and SNPS did not resolve that case either amongst a number of animals. UCD has expended far more time in analysis on this case than the fees charged for the genotypes tested by microsatellite to try and resolve the parentage. (UCD also took the owner's SNPS reports on a number of other animals in the herd to try and help the owner resolve the parentage issue. I have some experience on line bred herds and extended markers. There is NO Dexter owner that has worked to genotype and parentage confirm animals in a herd with the closely related animals that I have and SNPS though SNPS were considered. . . . they were not considered to be able to provide more answers than microsatellite testing. Someday maybe. By then there will likely be a bridge between the two technologies to make a transition beneficial. Judy If you use too-few SNPs in your test, the test can be less accurate than a Microsatellite based test. But the beauty of SNP is that because it is cheap and fast and fully automated, you can increase the number of SNPs and achieve EXTREME accuracy FAR beyond microsatellite, because it's impractical and costly to expand semi-manual and error-prone microsatellite testing. This study clearly tells us that SNP testing is far superior to microsatellite testing in distinguishing one close relative from another close relative: www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v103/n4/full/hdy200973a.htmlFurther, the fact that most all significant cattle breeds have already moved to SNP with great success, some as long as 6 years ago tells us that SNP is beyond ready for prime-time. We're behind the times. Here are some of the breeds that are using SNP genotyping Angus Hereford Simmental Jersey Holstein We should have a discussion with the Angus and Hereford folks who have already been through all of this. Here's an interesting video www.youtube.co/watch?v=_HtyaeTZpKw
|
|
jamshundred
member
Help build the Legacy Dexter Cattle "Forever" Genotype database
Posts: 289
|
Post by jamshundred on Feb 19, 2013 23:59:34 GMT -5
Kirk, Why don't you go to the labs using SNPS who are NOT able to determine some parentage cases and tell them how to get it right?
One of the things I admire most about UCD is their dedication to doing things "right". I've been told by someone who was in a conversation with a lab that uses SNPS that they ( the lab) could ( and the opinion this person was given is that they would) manipulate results to give a person what they wanted or needed. This had to do with parentage.
I personally believe I've witnessed this in action - and with SNPS.
What in the heck to Dexters have to do with the Angus and Hereford breeds? Please stop telling me we should mirror those breeds in any way. They are man-made and probably man-tested disasters compared to my wonderful Dexters.
Judy
|
|
|
Post by wvdexters on Feb 20, 2013 13:39:22 GMT -5
Hi guys. I've been feeling a little under the weather these past few days; darn winter cold. It just seems to keep hanging on. I'm just looking forward to spring here.
Anyway with all the talk on Angus lately and how we need to model ourselves after these folks I decided to spend some of my "free time" watching the "Angus Report" on RFD TV. An eye-opening experience to say the least.
There was much talk on genetics; choosing bulls, breeding heifers to be mothers of bulls, breeding heifers for replacements in the beef producing herds, breeding for animals that will do well in the feed lots. They talked of traits like tenderness and marbling that they want to breed into their herds through bull selection. Choosing lower birth weight bulls was an issue.
They had an interesting section where they want the ranchers to test all their animals for certain traits so they could see how their animals are doing genetically compared to others in the breed. This was set up to they could see how they stand with the "trends" in the angus breed.
I watched a few other shows too and was very discouraged that the vast majority of the ads were from the big chemical companies.
I have to say; I pray that this is not the direction we will be going in the future. I personally want no part of this system. I invite everyone to check this out for yourself and see if this is where you want to take your dexters in the future. See if this is the model you want to chase.
I personally think we have something much better.
|
|
|
Post by Cascade Meadows Farm - Kirk on Feb 20, 2013 18:01:39 GMT -5
What in the heck to Dexters have to do with the Angus and Hereford breeds? Judy Dexters are a VERY minor breed. If we want to dabble in DNA-testing and parentage testing, we best keep an eye on where all cattle breeds are heading because they set the direction for DNA testing technology. Parentage testing and A2 testing and polled testing and other testing was developed for the big breeds... we just go along for the ride. If you don't follow the crowd in technology, then you'll get stranded in old outdated technology. Now if you don't want to dabble in DNA testing because you don't want to be like the big breeds, then let's abandon DNA testing altogether. I'd be fully supportive of that. I don't do any DNA testing for any of my other heritage breeds including Icelandic Sheep and American Guinea Hogs and Speckled Sussex chickens and I'm happy about that. But it seems like some folks here are pushing hard for full DNA parentage testing. If we're going to do it, then we better do it right. Yes, the old microsatellite testing can be held together with bailing twine for a few more years, just like your old computer with floppy discs could still sort-of work... But you've got to move forward sooner or later, or we'll get stranded in old technology. The time to move forward to SNP parentage verification is BEFORE we start testing a whole bunch of females under the old technology. Just ask the Hereford folks... they've already been through this. PS. On our farm, we do almost NOTHING like the big breeds do.... No Chemicals, No vaccinations (except required brucellosis), No grain feeding, No Chemical De-Worming, No Antibiotics, No castration, No dehorning, no AI, no liquid nitrogen tanks, no pregnancy tests, no vets, no calving assistance (99% of time). We're thrilled that dexters are such a great heritage breed that they allow us to do things the old fashioned way.
|
|
|
Post by rezzfullacres on Feb 21, 2013 8:50:34 GMT -5
I will make this point one more time............Contrary to some opinions no one on this board is a genetic scientist, no one on the ADCA BOD is a genetic scientist so why are we trying to make decisions we are not qualified to make? Maybe some of you stayed at a holiday inn express last night but that is not good enough for me......As far as I know the ADCA has a fair amount of cash on hand, why not use it? Hire 3 independent animal genetic scientists (none from TA&M or UCD) to do a study comparing current existing testing procedures and making a recommendation on what direction would be best for the Dexter breed, not individual owners, labs or databases....Give them 120-180 days to complete their work, publish their work to the membership and give the members 60 days to review and comment THAN formulate the official testing plan, implement the plan.....So at worst you are looking at implementing the "plan" in less than 1 years time...There are plenty of scientists out there working for some of the greatest institutions who know tons more than ANY of us, find them and utilize them......JMHO
|
|